The Sun. — London, England, 1836-05-14 00:00:00

S TilE PUBLIC JOURNALS. In the House of Commo laSt night, Sir George Sinclair avr.iled 'Arrr die return of the Conalmlary Force (Ireland) Bill , Lords, with amendments, to launch out iuto -tvartn'praise of that assembly, and observed - teat this 'isms one c: the ninny occasions on which the utility of the Kouse of Lords was clearly demonstrated. Most wholesome changes; he said, had been made, and the total expense had been greatly diminished, Mi mister-sin the House of Lords acquiesced itr the amend- ' orients. The lion. Baronet trusted " that justice. on this head wmild he done' to the assembly by which so much public good had been accomplished." So eager was lie that the merits: of the LordS should not be lost on the country, tl7,at he was even for appending the sche dules with the amendments, in order to show what had been done since the measure passed the Commons. Qui ssexcuses'accusc, sayc the French proverb. Sir G.Sinclair eacerly lays hold of the amendments in the Constabulary Bill to J:ow that it is quite a mistake that the Lords ate always doing mischief. It would be strange, indeed, if Blils in their passage through h secon d b ranc h o f the Legislature should' not be occasionally improved. I Surely the Hon. Baronet does not suppose 'that the people believe the House of Lords determined to do mischief for the sake of mischief. Jonathan Wilde even was at great pains to ineulcate_ the importance of never doing more mischief than the occasion requires. Sir George's eulogy, .nowever, has reference to an other matter, on \Nnich the Commons will. soon be called to exere.se their judgment, when it is probable the alterations made by their Lordships will not ap pear in the light of improvements ; and he no doubt conceives that the great obligation we are under to the Peers, for not altogether destroying the Constabulary Bill, ought to , be received as a sufficient excuse for the treatment another Bill may receive. But fault has been fo - and with their Lordships for their omissions. The other night the Attorney-General alluded significantly to the dormitory of their Lordships, in which many measures have long enjoyed an undisturbed re pose. When the Irish Corporations Bill is to be de stroyed their Lordships are activity itself. We wish the could observe a portion of that activity in the case of many other Bills, which cri;• s 'at not to be delayed. For instance, the Municipal . Corporation Act Amend ment Bill was read a second time on the 29th of March last, and refarred to a committee. Nothing, however, has sine been heard of the Bill ; and in the mean time th', utmost inconvenience is suffered from the delay. Several boroughs may at present be said to be ver g i ng on anarchy, from the absence of all legal autho:ity to administer their municipal affairs. To take the case of Ipswich, the Tory mayor so managed matters, that the elections under the Municipal Re farm Act were invalid—a defect which cannot be re medied without a new Act, as the mayor, who had not a good title during the election, cannot have a better now. The consequence of this is, that funds could not have been obtained for the payment of the police and other ne cessary expences, had not individuals raised money on their private credit, and undertaken to indemnify all who incur any hazard by conducting the most in dispensable business. In the meantime demands have been made on a number of persons, in the name of the old Corporation, r.s, for instance, from those who had booths at the fair, and quo tvarranlos have been sued for the purpose of giving annoyance, and causing ex penne, which must be borne by the inhabitants of the bc,rough. We take the borough of Ipswich as au in stance; but there are, no doubt, a number of other places suffering in the same way. Surely, if ever there was a Bill which demanded instant attention from their Lordships, this is one. But it would not • at all surprise us if the Bill never found its - way out of the Committee. When Sir George Sinclair, there fore, next sings the praises of their Lordships, we trust he will not forget the inconvenience to which the country is put by their dilatory mode of proceeding in all hut destructive work.—Morning Chronicle. Nothing that may have occurred to us on first hear ing the discussion introduced by . Mr. Clay last Thurs day, could or can weaken our acknowledgment of the fact, that the banking system of the United Kingdom is in a state which calls for persevering watchfulness on the part of the Legislature, and of individual capi talists, even should there turn out to be no necessity for a formal change in the law upon that important question. Our own habitual, and often-repeated be lief, has been, that credit is too easily obtained in this country, for the interests of sound and wholesome commerce. There exists no other country in Europe where so much property is bought and sold on trust— where creditors are so full of easy faith—where debtors_ are so numerous—and, we fear, i n a multi tude of cases, so negligent of the obligation to punc tuality in payment. Hence a looseness in matters of dealing is interwoven with a greater laxity than exists amongst many other nations in one important branch of morals. It will of course be said that such a condi tion of things must inevitably right itself, and that in the long run the abuse of credit must bring its own correction. The answer to this is—look at the fact. Have not all the successive crashes in our commercial system proceeded invariably from an unwarrantable boldness of enterprise, stimulated by an extravagant and reckless facility of trust, which on both sides paid less regard to the demonstrable certainty of final ruin than to the flattering posssibility of imme diate gain, and of which one very extensive result, has been to demolish an immense proportion of people in middle life, whose moderate means would not enable them to struggle with any sudden and difficult emergency, concentrating in the coffers of a few leviathans of enormous wealth what remained from the fragments of ten thousand humbler fortunes? We are sure that if the state of things were s'..rictly investigated, it would be found on a comparif...on between the present and a former age, that a %inch greater difference now exists between the higly,,st class of capitalists and, all below them than coit'ul be alleged cf their respective grandfa thers—that the tendency of our system of credit has been to %well and strengthen the overgrown commercial oligarchy, and to wither and impoverish the small tra der-4.—to favour the centralization of riches, and oh s...met their diffusion—to favour the increase of half or quarter millionaires, and multiply among the shop keeping class the number of pinched, profitless, and hopeless insolvents. A system of dealing which is sub ject to great disturbance and convulsion at intervals of a dozen or a score of years, must produce or aggravate extreme inequality of fortune. The very strong, who are few, survive the tempest, and pick up the spoils of the multitude—the Very weak—wh o perish. Such is not a salutary posi!.ion of our trading world, and, as it must be closely connected with, if not in part depen dent on, the banking system or medium through which the machinery of credit has been con ducted, there does appear to be a primafizcie case for investigating the subject brought before Parliament by Mr. Clay. Upon two of the requisites proposed by the Member for the Tower Hamlets, as essential to .a sound flanking system, there can, we presume, be little di Terence of opinion. He recommends that every joint-stock company of bankers, who owe their exis tence to a friendly change in the law, should be. com pelled to make public the results of their management as bankers ; that those who have means of pushing their transactions to a vast extent, and drawing larzebt upon the public confidence, and thereby involving, many thousands of families in the issue of their pro ceedings, may be compelled to satisfy those who rely - upon them, as to the prudence and honesty of their acts, and not lead their customers ignorantly or blindly into peril. The Bank of England renders far more jl:,stice to the country by publishing its accounts than it formerly did by concealing them, and—we humbly conceive—has experienced no injury from the change. Then, as the expediency of paying up the amount of capital to which each shareholder in a joint-stock bank has pledged himself, it is, undoubtedly, nothing more than the redemption of a bond which has been offered to the public as its security against suffering by misplaced credit. At present, an individual not worth 1,0001. may hold himself out for having embarked ten times the sum as a joint-stock banker ; and when any . exigency in the commercial world arrives, he figures merely as an insolvent. Nay, worse than this—a joint stock bank may now be advertised and established by as Mr. Cl a y sa y s , o f needy men, on tire outlay, just money enough to " buy mahogany desks and' brass-plates upon their doors." But what security is there for the public in the partnership of five hundred :from tl such adventiNts,' having each, perhaps 301ita1'y hundred pounds to begin with 4." This is a feature of the present law Whiat loudly calls for change. But the th it& pthpoNition of Mr. Clay is one which seems t.O have met with some resistance : it is, pill holder in a joint-stock ban- nah!c just for the same sum which h t:! . 4.Mtiiillies, and no more. This is said to ifs.. the liability, and so it is ; for t r' hosash t\\b number of shar es an d amount of kounda--eor lin, undertaken b e actually ,vtlief,n-pt total publicly ascertained.A VAI),, ai, on the face of it, - - 1 1 0 , sufficient to .5 1 6pkioik.'t.6 business of an extensive bank, yet this voill 'n‘‘.4 Mcnre the public against loss. For instaffcet the public see a list of twenty names, some mon of large capital, some of small ; it may happen that the smallest capitalists may hold the largest por t:on of the shares, which thty Ynav have bought with borrowed money; to that they have no actual pro perty except the excess of the profit of the bank above the interest nhi c h they have tn pay to their private • creditors. On the etiffr hand, some millionaires may, as a partiM lhvestment, have embarked some of their money in purchasing shot - 7, of • a joint stock bank. The public rah the list, and seeing great names of largtAinded or many-acred men, im plicitly confidd their property to what they know must be safe keeping. And the keeping is safe, while the landlords and fundlords are wholly liable, because, for their own sakes, these leviathans will take care that the bank is well administered. Once let them be pronounced only partially liable, - and they will scarcely remember the existence of the bank, except when they occasionally receive some interest for their investment; and being engaged in enterprises of far greater import ance, would suffer an establishment which affects their prospects but in a trivial degree to fall into decay or ruin, with as much indifference as they hear of the break-down of an old carriage or an old cow-house. No, it is to the wealthy shareholder that the public, looks for security ; destroy, or, which is the same thing, limit his liability, and the bank becomes a delusion. This is the sound law of the ques tion, as expounded by the first lawyer of the clay; and it is sound law because it is the only law on such a matter which is at once intelligible, just, and safe. We have not time, at present, to enter more at large upon the question, which is to be placed in the hands of a committee. But its importance is beyond dispute. It will be observed that Mr. Daniel O'Connell, who is not merely demagogue, but brewer, banker, and os tensibly 6r secretly embarked in 20 other callings, took a part as much distinguished by bitterness as by igno rance against the motion of Mr. Clay. And certainly, if there were no reason for attributing to the views of the latter gentleman a tendency to improve the solidity and security of banks, to exclude from their manage ment a set of desperate gamblers, and to. exact on be half of the public as a condition that their conduct should be upright, and their funds substantial, the sneering and indecent disapprobation bestowed upon the Member for the Tower Hamlets, by the agitatitg brewer, banker, &c., would have much inclined us to anticipate fruits from the proposal of •Mr. Clay de cidedly, except in the one instance of limited liability, favimrable to sound banking, and fatal to that which was unsound.— Times. A short conversation took place last night in the House of Lords on the subject of the Irish Corpora tion Bill, which can scarcely fail to attract the atten tion of the public. That conversation related to the position in which the measure now stands in Parlia ment and before the country. The Bill as it exists in its present shape on the table of the House of Lords is, as we think, a far better measure than that which their Lordships received from the House of Commons. It has no doubt undergone considerable alterations, and alterations, too, which, it cannot be denied, mate rially affect its principle. Without such alterations it could not have been divested of what was pernicious in its original character. But it is still calculated to effect much of its original purpose. It will still abolish the Corporations of Ireland, and put an end to those abuses and defects in municipal government in that country upon which Ministers and their partisans have delighted to dwell, and which no considerable number of the opponents of Ministers have .thought it their duty to deny or defend. The alterations of the measure, it may also be observed, considerable as they unquestionably are, have not yet been sufficient to induce his Majesty's Ministers ex plicitly to abandon it. No member of the Ministry has yet said, although several days have elapsed since the House of Lords resolved upon the changes they would effect in the measure, that the Government had determined to abandon it. During this interval the Bill has been, as it were, suspended, like Mahomet's coffin, between earth and heaven ; occupying a middle state of existence ; living precariously on the confines, but not yet entirely expelled from, the Parliamentary Paradise of Ministerial favOur. The position of the Bill is`perceived to be singular, but it is also perceived to be so only in common with that of the authors of the Bill. The latter are also in a middle state. They cannot make up their minds whether the Irish Corporation Bill is still to be regarded as a Minis terial measure, because they cannot exactly know from day to day whether they may still regard them selves as Ministers of the Crown. They have evi dently been watching for the signal which they ex pected from without, and to which they had resolved to yield implicit obedience. But the signal is unfor tunately withheld, and they know not what to do. It is perfectly clear that the Premier and the other Mi nisters of the Crown who have seats :n the House of Lords are not opposed upon principle to the measure relating to the Irish Corporations, as that measure has been amended in their Lordships' House, in pur suance of the instructions given to the Committee on the motion of Lord Fitzgerald. This, we say, is per fectly indisputable ; for had the Ministers of the Crown been opposed upon principle to the measure as amended it would have been their natural course and their obvious duty to say, in express terms, that they abandoned the further prosecution of the measure. This they have carefully refrained from saying. So far, in deed, from saying this, or anything like it, we find a Minister of the Crown last night making arrangements for the further progress of the Bill, and intimating even . that he had paid an attevion to its printing more vigilant than we incline to think the present Ministers generally bestow upon this process in relation to Bills which they regard as unequivocally their own. What the House of Lords would do with the Irish Cor poration Biil, Ministers coula pretty confidently guess from the period of Lord Francis Egerton's motion to amend it in the I-louse of Commons. The whole intervening time has been theirs, to de termine what course they would pursue in circum stances which they could not but anticipate, so far as that course was dependent upon the merits of the amendments. What might be the character of the exact force of the pressure from without, what degree of po pular excitement in Great Britain or in Ireland the Ra dical and Popish confederates of Ministers might be able to get up, on the occasion of the Lords' amend ments of the Bill, were facts, however, which could not be anticipated with the same correctness. The latter, however, were the important points in Minis terial estimation. ' But for the uncertainty which pre vailed with respect to th ese , 'Mi n i s t ers might have been prepared at once to take their ground, and it is perfectly clear from all that has passed would at once have taken their ground, in favour of the Bill as amended. Whatever Ministers may be goaded or impelled to do hereafter, the facts as they now stand amount to a full demonstration that they think the Bill as it is is a good Bill, and that they are only deterred from embracing it cordially, and supporting it effectually, by fear of the displeasure of some of their Parliamentary or by an apprehension that the diligent and stre nuous efforts which are making to . excite a popular effervescence on the subject may be in some degree successful: We wish we could inspire•the Ministers of, the Crown with some portion of that moral courage in which they seem on the present occasion so pitiably deficient. They are manifestly terrifying themselves with a mere bugbear. If they could but make up their minds to act for once a manly and conscientious part, they have nothing to fear. There is no symp tom of popular effervescence on the subject, notwith standing the strenuous exertions which are daily mak ing to excite it. And as it is evident that no popular ferment can be aroused in opposition to the wise and patriotic conduct of the Lords, it follows, as a matter THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 14, 1836. of course, that Niinistei§ heed tipprElielid tid de!lettioti of their Parliaufentafy allies ill fhb &het Fio iluiY cordially sbeili they rimy identify themseives ith that cbudiici.r• - .7- - -310rning Post. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. MOUSE OF LORDS, MAY 13. A little after rive o'clock the Lone CIIaNCELLOR took his 'at on the Woolsack: ?,11!;SSAGIA FROM: TILE COMMON'S. everal lion. Memi;ers 40:it'ed at the Bar ; e nd brought ilp Cie Stafford Witnesses' Indemnity- Bill, the Great :Vestei'n Railway, the Roman Catholic marriages, the Birmingham, Bristol, and Thames Railway, and other Bills. SABBATH OBSERVANCE. Lord SK ELME RSDA L E pre3ented petitions from Wigan and other places, praying for a better observance of the Sabbath. POOR LAWS WIELAND). The Duke of LEINSTER presented a petition from the mayor and citizens of Dublin, in favour of poor laws. The Noble Duke, although he did not go the full length with the petitioners, still thought that some system should be intro duced to relieve the destitute poor. Lord M ALM SBURY supported the prayer of the petition, and said a very strong feeling prevailed in England in favour Poor Laws for Ireland. The Marquis of DO WNSHIRE was of opinion that it would be better to wait until they saw how the Poor Law Amendment Act worked before they introduced any measure on the subject of Poor Laws in Ireland. Lord FITZGERALD said it was impossible for any one who read the Report of the Poor Law Commissioners, not to be convinced that some measure of poor laws must be intro troduced into Ireland. At the same time, they must also pro ceed with caution. The Duke of RICHMOND was always of opinion that the best mode of giving relief to the poor of Ireland was a poor law, and such a measure would keep them at home and make them apply to acts of industry. Earl WICKLOW said his Majesty's Government could not be blamed for not having brought forward a measure on the subject during the present Session ; it was a question of great importance, and should be approached with caution. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that Ireland, by reducing the price of food, had conferred great benefit on the manufacturers of England. The Duke of RICHMOND admitted that the influx of Irish labourers into this market, had the effect of reducing the price of food. The Marquis of L ANS DOIXNE said that it must not be inferred that because Government had not brought forward a hasty and ill-digested measure of poor laws, that therefore they were opposed to the principle. He could assure their Lordships that his Majesty's Government would bestow on the question all the attention which its importance demanded. Earl \VINCHILSEA said that it would be impossible in many Counties in England and Scotland to get in the harvest without the assistance of Irish labourers. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. The Marquis of BRISTOL presented a petition from the prisoners confined in Whitecross-street prison, praying for the Abolition of Imprisonment for Debt. REGISTRATION OF ALIENS. The Marquis of L AN SD 0 WNE moved the second reading of this Bill. The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted on' Monday. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAAUTtii. sr. JAA ALACE, MAY 12. S 0; ti. .14s this day pleased, on the nomination of Lord ~utey, to appoint William Daniel Bullock, Esq., one of his Ma jesty's Honourable Corps of Gentlemen at Arms, vice Hector Ar chibald Macneil, E.g., resigned. CROWN-OFFICE, MAY 13, 1836. 3IEMUERS RETTIRNED TO SERVE IN Tills PnESENT PARLIAMENT. County of Mayo—Robert Dillon Browne of Glencorrib, in the county of Mayo, Esq., in the room of the Right Hon. Dominick Browne, now Lord Oranmore, a Pcer of Ireland. WAR-OFFICE, MAI' 13. Ist Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Capt. W. J. M. Hughes, kern the 4th Light Dragoons, to be Captain, vice Grant, who ex changes, May 13. sth Regiment of Dragoon Guards—A. 11. Hamilton, Gent. to be Cornet ) by purchase, vice Knipe, promoted, May 13. 4th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Capt. E. B. Grant, from the Ist Dragoon Guards, to le Captain, vice Hughes, who ex changes, May 13. • 15th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut. W. Murray to be Captain, by purchase, vice Ives, who retires ; Cornet F. Sutton to be Lieut. by purchase, vice Murray, May 13; Ensign J. B. Pil grim, from the 36th Regiment, to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Drummond, promoted, May 12 A. S. Murray, Gent., to be Cor net, by purchase, vice Sutton, Slay 13. Ist Regiment of Foot—Surgeon J. B. Kell, from the 82d Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Bell, deceased, May 13. 4th Foot—Lieut. W. Grey, from the 75th Foot, to be Lieute nant, vice Ricard, who exchanges, May 13. 12th Foot—C. Simeon, Gent., to be, Ensign, by purchase, vice Netterville, who retires, May 'M 14th Foot—Captain G. B. Sutherland, from the 38th Foot, to be Captain, vice Storks, who exchanges, May 13. 23d Foot—Lieut. S. Powell to be Captain, by purchase, vice Gourlay, who retires ; Second Lieut. P. Gough to be First Lieu tenant, by purchase, vice Powell; F. A. D. Roebuck, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Gough, May 13. 36th Foot—E. W. Jennings, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Pilgrim, appointed to the 15th Light Dragoons, May 14. 38th Foot—Capt. H. K. Storks, from the 14th Foot, .to be Captain, vice Sutherland, who exchanges, May 13. 53d Foot--Major R. F. Hill to be Lieut. -Colonel, by purchase, vice Hewitt, who retires ; Capt. P. Hill to be Major, by purchase, vice Hill ; Lieut. W. O'Brien to be Captain, by purchase, vice Hill ; Ensign W. Stewart, to be Lieut., by purchase, vice O'Brien ; Gentleman Cadet G. Pleydell slansel, from the Royal Military College, to be Ensign, by purchase vice Stewart, May 13. 58th Foot—Ensign W. E. Grant to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Buchanan, who retires ; R. Denny, Gent. to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Grant, May 13. 68th Foot—Lieut. W. H. Gillman to be Captain, by purchase, vice Strachan, who retires ; Ensign and Adjutant A. Mainwaring to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Gillman ; Ensign H. G. Wynne, from the 97th Regiment of Foot, to be Ensign, vice Mainwaring, May 13. 71st Foot--Major Hon. C. Napier, from the half-pay Unattached to be Major, vice S. D. Pritchard, who exchanges, May 13. 74th Foot—Lieut. E. C. Munns, from the 81st Foot, to be Lieu tenant, vice Raikes, who exchanges, May 13. 75th Foot—Lieut. E. Ricard, from the 4th Regiment of Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Grey, who exchanges, May 13. 81st Foot—Lieut. G. W. Raikes, from the 74th Regiment of Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Munns, who exchanges, May 13. 82d Foot--Staff-Assistant-Surgeon Patrick Pope, M.D., to be Surgeon, vice Kell, appointed to the Ist Foot, May 13. 94th Foot—Lieut. A. Tomkins, from the Ceylon Rifle Regiment, to be Lieutenant, vice W. F. Webster, who retires upon half-pay of the 2d Ceylon Regiment, Msy 13. 97th Foot—T. 0. W. Ingram, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur ease, vice Wynne, appointed to the 68th Regiment of Foot, May 13. 2d West India Regiment.—To be Ensigns, by purchase.—G. Stoney, Gent., vice Richardson, promoted, May 13; T. Spring, Gent., vice Humbley, appointed to the 4th Light Dragoons, May 14. Ceylon Rifle Regiment.—Captain J. P. Bontein, from the half pay of the 3d Ceylon Regiment, to be Captain, vice T. B. Gas coyne, who exchanges. receiving the difference, May 13 ; Lieute nant B. E. Layard to be Captain, by purchase, vice Bontein, who retires ; Second Lieutenant W. Jones to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Layard, May 14 ; Lieutenant F. Ostheyden, from the lialf-pay of the 2d Ceylon Regiment, vice Tomkins, appointed to tile 94th Foot, May 13 ; C. Garstin, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Jones, May 14. HOSPITAL STAIT. W. Dick, M.D., to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Pope, promoted in the 82d Regiment of Foot, May 13. MEMORANDUM. The King has been pleased to command, that the sth or Nor thumberland, Regiment of Foot shall in future be equipped as a Fusilier Regiment, and be styled the sth Regiment 'of Foot, or Northumberland Fusiliers. His Majesty has been graciously pleased to permit the 12th and 58th Regiments to bear on their colours and appointments, in ad dition to the word Gibraltar, " the following distinctions, viz.— The Castle and Key, and the Motto, " Montis Insignia Calpe," in commemoration of their services during the memorable defence of Gibraltar in the year 1782. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Northampton. Brackley and Chippingwarden Squadron of Yeomanry Cavalry. C. Willes, Gent., to be Cornet, March 29. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Nottingham. Clumber Troop of Sherwood Rangers. W. P. Clinton, Esq., commonly called Lord William Pelham Clinton, to be First Lieutenant, in the room of W. H. Barrow, resigned, May 2. Southern Regiment of Nottinghamshire Yeomanry Cavalry. E. Percy, Gent., to be Lieutenant, in the place of T. A. Camp bell, resigned, May 2. Newark Troop of Sherwood Rangers. T. S. Godfrey, Esq., to be Captain, in the room of J. Handley, Esq., resigned ; G. Hutton, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, May 2. _ _ _ _ Mansfield Troop of Sherwood Ranger*. G. Tallents, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, in the room of E. Percy, resigned, May 2. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. Cumberland. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM EVANS BRIDEN, surgeon, Great Coram-street, Brunswick-square, to surrender May 24, at half-past one, and June 24, at 'eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Berry, Trafalgar.. square, Charing-cross ; Graham, official assignee, 3, Copthall buildings. JOHN LAMASON MORTIMER, linen-draper, St. Thomas the Apostle, near Exeter, May 24, at one, and June 24, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turner and Hensman, Basing-lane, Cheapside, London ; Tnrquand, official assignee, Copthall-buildings. SOPHIA SHOWLEIt, brass-founder, Litchfield-street, New part-Market, May 24, at one, and June 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Gibson, official assignee, 72, Basinghall-street ; Crosby, King.street, Cheapside. GEORGE LANE, wine-merchant, Bath, May 25, and June 24, at one, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol. Stevens, Gray's inn-square ; Haberfield, Bristol. WILLIAM MURRAY CLAPP, ironmonger, Exeter, May 25, and June 24, at twelve, at the George Inn, Exeter. Adlington, Gregory, Faulkner, and Follett, 1, Bedford-row, London ; Furlong, Northernhay, Exeter. JOHN PRITCHARD, victualler, Kingswinford, Staffordshire, May 30, and June 24, at ten, at the Crown Inn, Stourbridge. White and Whitmore, 11, Bedford-row, London; Holdsworth and Finch, Worcester. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. J. H. Prior, corn dealer, London-road, Southwark, June 3, at one—W. Cole, bricklayer, Great Barlow-street, Marylebonc, June 4, at twelve—J. Plummer and W. Wilson, dealers, Fenchurch strvet, June 4, at. half-past one—W. Parry and C. Berry, uphol sterers, Oxford-street, June 3, at half-past eleven—C. Gell and 'f. Carman, lead merchants, Tottenham-court-road, June 3, at eleven —.J. H. Lean, insurance broker, Fenehurch-street,June 3, at twelve. In the Country. R. Rowlands, coal dealer, Worcester, June 10, at eleven, at the Hopmarket Inn, Worcester—G. Dobson, grocer, Hatton, Cheshire, June 21, at one, at the Clarendon Rooms, Liverpool—J. !Tony church, jun., and T. Honychurch, potters, Bovey T racev, Devon shire, June 15, at twelve, at the Half Moon In n , E xeter —J. Cooper, joiner, Liverpool, June 4, at one, at the Clarendon Rooms, Liverpool—J. Staley, druggist, Winney, Oxfordshire, June 4, at ten, at the Mitre Inn, Oxford—J. Walker, tanner, Worcester, June 11, at twelve, at the Crown Hotel, Worcester—P. Penswick, cotton manufacturer, Ashton, Lancashire, June 11, at eleven, at the Clarendon Rooms, Liverpool. CERTIFICATES. —JuNE 3. T. Minton, .„.rocer, Beak-street, Regent-street—W. Tatchell and S. Clarke, }temp dealers, Great Eastcheap—S. and J. Marks, glass merchants, Exeter—F. Moore, son., sugar refiner, Albany road, Camberwell ' — W. —W. F. Hoyland, grocer, Bradford, Yorkshire —H Wellings, . victualler, Birmingham—Z. Devoge, jacquard ma chine maker, Manchester—S. Luscombe, jun., Broadhempston, Devonshire. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. T. Clayton and W. Helme, cotton spinners, Preston, Lancashire —G. and W. Powell, farmers, East Lentham, Kent—R. C. Frost and J. E. Burton, Lower Thames-street—S. and E. Green, go vernesses, Wellington-street, Wellington, Shropshire —R. Mayor and J. Napier, dyers, Manchester—J. Patrick and S. Smith, flax spinners, West-end, Fewstone, Yorkshire—C. S an d erson and T . Makin, file manufacturers, Hollis-Croft, Sheffield—.G. Smith and J. Parker, discount brokers, Nicholas-lane, Lombard-street—A. Most= and J. Wybergh, commission merchants, Liverpool— H. Lucas and E. Sell, woollen drapers, Dover —M. Green and A. Clarke, milliners, Bennett-street, Walcot, Somersetshire—W. T. Oakes and C. Hicks, Manchester—H. Duckworth and J. Bancroft, iron forgers, Manchester—W. Waugh and M. Laws, corn factors, Surrey-street, Strand—J.and S. Shaw, cotton dyers, Mold Green, Dalton, Yorkshire—T. Longstreeth and J. Foxwell, tailors, Berkely, Gloucestershire. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION. ISABELLA VAN STAVEREN, silk dealer, Edinburgh, May 21 and June 4, at one, at the Old Signet Hall, Royal Exchange, Edinburgh. Prince Ernest of Hesse Phillipsthal, accompanied by the Earl of Denbigh, paid a visit on Thursday to the Greenwich Railway. SINGULAR CASE.—On Saturday, Mr. Armstrong, who had been for many years a watchmaker, at Liverpool, made application to the Magistrates of Lambeth-street for the restoration of a watch, valued at 161. It may, perhaps, be re collected, that about nine years since, Mr. Armstrong's pre mises were entered, and property, valued at 6001., stolen, none of which, however, was recovered, except the watch in ques tion, which was found, among similar property, at the house of lkey Solomons. Mr. Armstrong attended the examination of Solomons, and identified the watch. Solomons, however, escaped to Amcriea, and before was brought hack to this country Mr. Armstrong went out to the East Indies, and, of course, could not attend on the trial, and the watch remained in the possession of Lea, the officer. Mr. Armstrong having now returned, c i a i n itti the watch. In answer to questions from the Magistrate, Mr. Armstrong st a t e d, that in conse quence of th e burglary at his house, he was reduced to such a state of destitution as to be compelled to enlist as a private soldier in the 16th Light Dragoons, serving in India ; since then he had been promoted to the rank of sergeant-major, but his brother, wishing him to return borne, had purchased his discharge. The Magistrate ordered the watch to be delivered to Mr. Armstrong, on his giving a proper receipt for it. SABBATH OBSERVANGE. The Marquis of BUTE presented several petitions on this subject. IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, that not seeing the Noble and Learned Lord in his place (Lord Lynd hurst), he presumed he would only be anticipating his wish if he postponed the Bill in which he had so many amendments, and which might now be called his Bill, until Monday. The Earl of ROSSLYN disclaimed, on the part of the Noble and Learned Lord, any wish to interfere with the ap pointment of the time for the discussion of Bills brought in by the Government. Lord HOLLAND begged to know whether it was to be understood that the Bill was to be proceeded with on Monday. Undoubtedly neither the title or preamble of the Bill was their's, and they had a right therefore to call it the Bill of the Noble and Learned Lord. Earl ROSSLYN said his Noble and Learned Friend would be in his place to do his duty on Monday. Their Lordships then adjourned to Monday. ROUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 13. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. WALKER presented a petition in favour of the Man chester and Salford Junction Railway. The Steppingly (Bedford) Enclosure Bill was read a third time and -passed. GLASGOW AND FALKIRK RAILWAY. Mr. GILLON presented a petition from Falkirk in favour of the Glasgow and Falkirk Railway Bill. Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from Preston against the Western Counties Railway Bill. LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAILWAY. Lord G. LENNOX moved that the London and Brighton Railway Committee be allowed to sit to-morrow.—Agreed to. The NOBLE LORD then gave notice that on Monday he should move that the time be enlarged for the London and Brighton Committee to make its report. On the motion of Mr. SAND FO R D the South Pethcrton Inclosure Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. SCHOLEFIELD brought up the Report of the Com mittee on the Birmingham Coal Bill. The Report of the Committee on the Nene Outfall Bill was brought up. Col. SIBTHORPE presented a petition from the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln against the Perlethorp Chapelry Bill, and praying to be heard against it by their Counsel, agents, and witnesses. Mr. HOWARD moved that the Carlisle Dock Bill be re committed on Monday next.—Ordered. The Cow-causway and Bucktonburn Road Bill was read a se cond time on the motion of Sir M. W. RIDLEY. Mr. EWART presented a petition from the Town Council of Liverpool, against the Liverpool Dock Bill. TRANSFER OF SHARES. Mr. WALKER presented three petitions from building societies, prdying that that trade might be exempted from•the liability of paying taxes upon the transfer of shares. Also a petition from some place in Lancashire, praying for the better observance of the Sabbath. SEE OF DURHAM. Mr. INGHAM presented a petition from South Shields, stating that the See of Durham had received 6,0001. a-year in the way of rent and fines from the town of South Shields, and therefore praying that in the Bill for appropriating the revenues of the See of Durham, provisions might be intro duced for furnishing a perpetual endowment to the Ministers and working Clergy of the town of South Shields. SOLICITORS' CERTIFICATES. Captain BERKELEY presented a petition from the soli citors of Gloucester, praying for relief from the duty on their certificates. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. Colonel WOOD presented a petition from the vicar, cu rate, churchwarden, and other inhabitants of Staines, in favour of the Bill for the better observance of the Sabbath. Mr. PEMBERTON presented a petition from Ripon, to the same effect. RURAL POLICE. Sir 0. MOSLEY presented a petition from parishes in Derbyshire, complaining of the system of Rural Police. Its object was, that some plan might be adopted by the Legisla ture, and sanctioned by the House, for the improvement of the Rural Police establishment. The petitioners complained that such was the manner in which the beer shops were con ducted, that persons of moral habits could not pass them by without molestation, to the great profanation of the Lord's Day ; and at present there existed no effective Police esta blishment to suppress the evils complained of. TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE. Mr. H UME presented six petitions, all praying for the total abolition of the duties on Newspapers. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. Mr. PEMBERTON presented two petitions against certain clauses in the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill. DISSENTING HOUSES OF WORSHIP. Mr. AINSWORTH presented a petition from the Pro testant Dissenters of Norwich, that the trustees of their churches and chapels should be exempt from stamp duty in all their contracts; also from a School Building Society, praying that they might be exempt from duty in the transfer of their shares. CHURCH PLURALITIES BILL. Sir H. HARDING P, presented a petition from the Master of Berkempstead School, praying that he might be permitted to held that appointment in conjunction with his living, notwith standing the provisions of the Church Pluralities Bill. TURNPIKE TRUSTS. Mr. WILBRAHA NI presented a petition, praying for the consolidation of certain turnpike trusts. AFFAIRS OF CALCUTTA. Mr. HUME said the petition, of which he had given no tice, on the subject of the commerce of Calcutta, also related to the whole system of Government in India. He had, there fore, been requested by his Right lion. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, to fix another day for its presentation, as it would be inconvenient for him to attend this evening. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE said that the notice on the paper had no reference to any matter but the commerce of Calcutta. At the suggestion of the SPEAKER, Mr. HUME brought up the petition, which was ordered to be printed with the votes, and the first Thursday after the holidays fixed for taking it into consideration. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented petitions against the Ecclesiastical Leases Bill ; two petitions from unions of pa rishes in Kent, praying for the extension of the time for re paying the money advanced for building poor-houses. Also petitions against two Bills introduced by his Majesty's Attor ney-General, and now before the House for abolishing the customary mode of descent, and the law of gavel-kind; and from the Archdeacon and Clergy of Canterbury against cer tain clauses in the Dissenters' Marriage Bill. Lord MANDEVILLE presented several petitions from places in the counties of Essex and Huntingdon, relative to agricultural distress.—Referred to the Agricultural Committee. Mr. GROTE presented a great number of petitions from workmen in Messrs. Maudesly and Fields, and other works in London and its neighbourhood, praying for the abolition of the Stamp Duty on Newspapers. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a ser geant in the 17th Regiment of Foot, praying for a copy of the Court-martial by which he was tried. On the motion of Mr. WYNNE, the Stafford witnesses in demnity Bill was read a third time and passed. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. The House having been at a complete stand still for full ten minutes, Mr. H UME rose and suggested whether in future it would not be better that the public busiuess should begia at half past four, this bein7 the third day on uhieh the House had been unoccupied from hall-past four up to five o'clock. Mr. G. F. YOUNG thought it would not be proper to come to such a resolution in the absence of his Ma jesty's Ministers, and he believed that the arrangement had been come to, that the public business should not com mence till five o'clock, in consideration or the many claims for the attendance of his Majesty's Ministers elsewhere during the day. I:CRANKY; ROADS. Mr. HAWES presented a petition from the parishioners of Dunuhurch, praying that no turnpike roa6 should be made through any district without the consent of three lotitths of the Parishioners. CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND.) Lord MORPETH moved that the Lords' Amendment to the Constabulary Force (Ireland) Bill, be printed. Mr. SINCLAIR thought the present was one of the many occasions which must convince the public, notwithstanding all that had been said to the contrary, of the utility of the Henn of Lords.—( Hear, and a laugh.) They -,11 knew to what an extent the Bill confirmed patronage upon his Majesty's Go vernment as it originally stood, and also the large amount of additional expense created by it. He thought it would be advisable that the schedules with the original Bill should be appended to the amendments, for the purpose of showing the House the number of offices and amount of salaries which had been reduced by the House of Lords. It surprised him (Sir G. Sinclair) how the Bill, as it had passed that House, had escaped the notice of the Hon. Member for Middlesex ; but he trusted their Lordships' amendments would render the Hon. Member more favourable to that branch of the Legis lature. Lord A:0 RPETH would content himself with moving that the amendments be printed—of course any remarks upon them would he more pertinent when the House was fully acquainted with their nature. Mr. HUME could assure the Hon. Baronet that he had not been asleep, but wide awake. He had often complained of the Constabulary Force being paid out of the Consolidated Fund. He thought the Government ought to come to that House, and ask for a grant for that purpose. He thought, however, the other House had made a mistake in the matter. He be lieved that the present Bill made a considerable reduction in the present expense of the force. DUBLIN POLICE BILL. Lord MORPETII moved the third reading of the above Bill. Mr. SHAW hoped the Noble Lord would not insist upon the head constables being put under the controul of the new Magistrates ; they were peculiarly the officers of the present Magistrates of the divisions. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. CRIMINAL LAWS. Sir E. WILMOT wished to ask a question of the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department. Some time ago be asked whether it was the intention of the Government to bring in a measure to establish summary tribunals to try offences of a petty description. The Noble Lord said that the subject was under the consideration of Government. Since that time a report had gone abroad which recommended the very thing which he ( Sir E. Wilmot) endeavoured to suggest as a proper remedy, viz., that prisoners should be tried by a Jury of five or seven. He wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce a measure on the subject ? Lord J. RUSSELL might bring in a Bill on this subject this session, but at the same time he would not hold out any great hopes that he would be able to carry the second reading in the present session. Sir E. WILMOT would bring in a measure himself, if the Government would support him in it ; not in all the details, but on the principle of it. RURAL POLICE. Sir 0. MOSELEY wished to know whether his Ma jesty's Government had it under consideration to bring in a Bill this Session, or very early in the next, to regulate the rural police. A measure on this subject was very much required, and the country felt very anxious that some measure on the subject should be passed. Lord J. RUSSELL said that a Bill was in preparation on the subject; but he could not say that he could bring it under the consideration of the House this session. If there was time he would do so, but it would altogether depend upon the ques tion of time. BISHOPRIC OF DURHAM BILL. Mr. BE RNEL brought up the Report of the Committee on this Bill. TITHE COMMUTATION BILL. On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the House went into Committee on the Tithes Commutation Bill. Mr. Bernal in the Chair. Upon the 34th Clause being put by the CHAIRMAN, Mr. FINCH rose to move the amendment of which he had given notice, that 751. should be substituted for 601. In doing so the Hon. Member said that upon consideration he should waive his amendment, and direct his observations chiefly to the clause. The reason why he moved in the place of 60/. 751. should be inserted, was a conviction that if a balance was struck between the tithe-payers and owners, 751. would be the proper amount. There was a variety of opinions upon the subject, and it was, therefore, difficult to say what was the proper amount, and what was not. Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to know whether he was to understand the Hon. Member as proposing an amendment with respect to whether it should be 60/. or 75/. ? Mr. FINCH observed that he was going to state why 75/. should be the amount fixed upon.—( Hear, hear.) — He could not give his sanction to any Bill that did not proceed upon the principle of equity. The only principle with which the people ought to be satisfied, and would be satisfied, was the principle of strict and substantial justice. It had been said that the public were interested in this Bill, but he contended that the Bill did not affect the rights or property of the people at all ; it went merely to arrange matters between the tithe-owner and the landed proprietor. He was sure the landed proprietors of England—he was sure the landed aristocracy of England—desired not to take one sixpence from the clergy of the Established Church. If they passed this Bill, how could they resist the principle of appro priation involved in the Irish Church Bill?—( Hear, hear.) He should, therefore, feel it his duty to give the clause his decided opposition. Mr. E STCOURT fully concurred in the observations of the Hon. Member who had last spoken. He believed the Noble Lord would shortly find that, instead of attempting a maximum and minimum, he should have adopted the sugges tion of the Hon. Member for Cumberland, and have recourse to a valuation. Mr. PA RROTT conceived that such a proposition would produce confusion throughout the entire country, and create enormous expense. He bad hoped that the minimum would have been fifty instead of sixty per cent. In his opinion, tithes were not worth more than they would produce in money, after deducting the expense of col lection. He should not make the 75 per cent. maximum, but would reserve to himself the power of objecting to the en tire clause hereafter. Mr. GOULBURN did not see why a special provision should be made for those cases in which the collection ex ceeded the maximum, while no special provision was made for those cases where the collection was less than the minimum There was no reciprocity in this instance. Mr. ESTCOURT said there were many cases where the collection did not amount to ten per cent. There was no provision for such a case. Sir J. WROTTESLEY complained of the heavy ex penses to which the tithe-payer was put. The thrashing of the corn alone cost 25 per cent. Mr. GOULBURN thought the Hon. Baronet did not take into his calculation the value of the straw. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL considered the straw to form part of the produce upon which the Hon. Bart. calcu lated. Sir R. PEEL understood that the 33d and 34th Clauses involved the main principles of the Bill—that the compul sory principle should be enforced, and that the maximum and minimum should be fixed. He would suggest that the discussion upon these points should be postponed, and he hoped the Noble Lord would not conceive, that in making any suggestion of this sort, there was any concession on the part of himself or those who acted with him. It appeared to him that no answer, had been given to the objections urged as to the maximum and the minimum of the last 7 years. Accord ing to the plan now proposed, the amount of commutation will depend in many cases on the lenity and forbearance of the clergyman, and it would be unfair that his for bearance should tend to his disadvantage. He thought in the arrangement the voluntary principle should be included. Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed that the basis which had been selected was taken on the ground that it was cal culated to lead to little disturbance ; and though in some cases it might be productive of difficulty, he was impressed with the opinion that it was the best that could be made choice of. Mr. BLAMIRE would be glad that the plan of fixing the minimum and maximum was abandoned, and a more satisfactory one established. He did not go quite the length of the Right Hon. Baronet, though he admitted there was some reality in his objections. Lord J. RUSSELL thought it would be better to postpone all discussion upon this and the subsequent clause until the bringing up of the report, when the necessary amendments might be made in it. Mr. PARROTT moved that a proviso be inserted at the end of the 34th clause, to the same effect as the amendment proposed and withdrawn by him on a previous evening, enact ing that a reduction of ten per cent. should be made on the aveYage of the valuation ascertained by the Commissioners. Lord J. RUSSELL opposed the motion. Mr. Gillon and Captain Curteis supported it, and Mr. E. Buller and Sir Price opposed it. After some further conversation the Committee divided. The numbers were : Against the amendment 73 In favour of it 3B Majority ... • 35 The question was then put that the clause as amended stand part of the Bill. Mr. WRIGHTSON rose for the purpose of moving that, the clause be omitted. After expressing his extreme unwil lingness to interpose any obstacle in the wa y of a measure of so much i m p or t ance , f or the introduction of which so much credit was due to his Majesty's Government, the Honourabl e Gentleman p rocee d e d to say that he felt satisfied the clause could never come into operation in a useful or s a ti s f actory manner. The 33d clause contained within itself all the mate rial principles involved in the present one ; and he considered it quite unnecessary to introduce a second principle, applica ble to the same point, the only effect of which wou ld b e t o commit a very gross injustice against a large cl ass o f p ersons , by disturbing the existing compositions, on the faith of which land had been let tithe free on the one hand, and taken on the other. The principle he wished to substitute had been ---- ---- ---- adopted again and again in former com:nutations of tithe : ter : sinew the injustice of that proposed by his Majesty's Minis.ned t ho need only refer to the evidence o f one witness, coati e l' o ef :ip r( :)s t i l t ' i e on Co t7r mit t l i t t ' l e ie an acre, 'o to stated th a t if h i s t ithe were taken in kind would amount ge more than his rent—to n 3 less perhaps than Os. all onwatslgirlitcuil,truersee,nttherount of wl % ) , o i se c, would only add, that in those parts of the countr) 77 n re;ci ,t this clause was understood, there was a very strong fee s ' u lir: jest,ag i n st preferring;it. l h e a a t , l , e not, the however,ina matter of Parliament, in which they placed a contidenc !, "Irish hoped would not be disappointed. There could he no ge ne cessity whatever for the present clause. The tithe owr,e:r. e. l present enjoyed a greater sum than they had ever enjoyed.!__ tore ; and tinny would hereafcer enjoy a larger sum than a e . : r t ( ! )L tl t r i e ti( l ' vls e d d on: uP° a nndel j atf ? ti h Dee e could lowe possessed under the existing law, or ever hop ed W . possess in their wildest moments. The lion. Member con eluded by moving the omission of the clause. Mr. GAIL I' K NIG HT stated that if clause 34 was ngre cil , , to, it would clef at the olject of the clauses already adoptrat If this part of the measure was adopted it would not giveltbill satisraclion to the country which should be the result of , ltis _ on this subject. It was his intention to propose another cl, u as an amendment to the present. the The CHAIRMAN reminded the Hon. Gentleman thatW be could not propose a substitute clause for the pre sent, until that mot before the Committee was disposed the clause should be negatived. the Mr. GALLY KNIGHT said that he should support amendment. rd, Mr. CA YLE Y had no hesitation in telling the Noble 1,0 the that if he did not modify this clause he would destroy tri t e o principle of the. Bill, which, no doubt. he was most anxi° ° , s ) carry. If he persisted on this part of the Bill, he (Mr. CareYoi of—namely, t" would tell the Noble Lord that he would lose the supfortt., those who were most anxious that the principle of comM u " tion should be carried into effect. Honorable Gentionneni3olll posite were most anxious to keep up those parts of the uld which appeared most favourable to the Church ; but wore? this satisfy those prepared to carry out a satisfactory tu r c as be rs He thought this was a point on which Honourable It em-- should make a stand. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed that the l th ; tion had been over and over again discussed relative t; be clause, and notwithstanding th e objections urged againSt 3 ' t hat preferred it as it now sto o d t o an y o f the amendment s • tare d had been proposed. The principle of the Bill was coata, in the 34th clause, which would affect the present cotr un- t he tion of tithes in the actual state of things. He entertaine. re. strongest objection to this amendment, as it would tend t l ec a vent a satisfactory settlement of the question. It had — t he said that in extreme cases the decision should be left t ° t o f this Commissioners, AAifkriierrt i‘dla would lead words l b e u a d t h too e frrtn w oeemd a e s dt ill convinced eiesrs.a ml Giteiigisdautmoi t oft h enN a n. t Et ~ any arra n g e and Sir R. PRICE, The Committee divided upon the question that Clause as amended, stand part of the Bill— Ayes Majority for the Clause ... 78 Noes m b e im i n ßo g Ed p u r sls o e, pos e d I to Lord J.:81155$ 31'144, •••• •••••• Clause 35 was postponed. for converting ACllra.ußseii3 A cor T n h r e er s i , t o ? i s sh f e ro d ma as fi k xe w d ha m t o n ne e y ce p ss a i y ty me t a b t er i e nt: l LICITOR-GENERAL said the o bject w a9 ralg re' m to o Ap v r e fote t d h ru e cac e feu x ln i v s i t f i lo r v i ro g mrd d its i y ffi . culties of the law of modjuses, an from Mr. E. Buller Mr. C a Y lell ' * O . Aglionby, Mr. Greene, and Lord J. Russell, r t . he Upondesultoryprogress.inclusiveconversation,werethen the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the 11 MANthe . 0 ,1 The other a w cr as r e :c e i re t f ; ri to, HAIR' Orders of the Day were then disposed oc, P House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock DUBLIN ELECTION COMMITTEE. The Committee met yesterday at eleven o'clock. Ato 011 The vote of John Armstrong having been objecteT s pogo Thursday evening, on the part o f th e s itti ng Member, "" ee t ill the class of persons disqualified, as holding an emploril the Post-office at the time of the election, A ote a Mr. WRANGIIAM contended in favour of the vote, 9 . 11 " decisions of former Committees in proof of its validity' c . esr Mr. AUSTEN replied, relying on the 43d Geo. 1 11 " t otil' which disqualifies all persons, " the Postmaster or rli per' tees-general, and his or their deputy or deputies, aor l , l l l ,, e titt sons concerned under him or them, in receiving, c°' - e psi' or managing the revenue of the Post-office, or an any thereof." The COMMITTEE, after a short deliberation, resolved j o y " That as John Armstrong is proved to have been .Pe the under the Postmaster-General in receiving and collect„Paeli revenue of the Post-Office in Ireland, he is expressly °lig., fled from voting by the Ist section of the Act 43 Georg e c. 25, and his vote must be struck off the poll." o n til There being three voters named J o h n A r mstrong a tha t registry, two of whom voted, Mr. Wrangham subm itte font" there was not sufficient proof of identity to warrant the mittee in striking the vote off the poll. be fore The Committee resolved—" That the evidence oil ° „o te the Committee is not sufficient to identify John Armstr e l tbe letter carrier, whom they have directed to be struck ,4,ste' poll, with John Armstrong, of No. 7, Wormvi° °- 't i/ described in the register as a furrier ; but, eS, it i i i alleged that the identity would have been prove tome list laid before the commissioners had been re o ,yeot. by them, the Committee will, if required by th e &Pi . for the sitting Members, give directions to their P ( " missioners to send over immediately any document in t at e. r session necessary to tLe elucidation of the facts of th e c fogibe This vote, therefore, was allowed to stand over for consideration. OA The vote of James Campbell, a letter-carrier, ve s c g o p s oo lll off the petitioners poll which restored Mr. 0 ' ,of majority. Flaine7 o Patrick Wogan, of 2, Taaffe's-row, and Wm. meov - be Gloucester-street, were then struck off the sitting 1 7 0 41 t poll, for an arrear of 'Wide-street cess. This P gby sitting Member in a minority of one. lt ° P John Horan and Henry Harris, jun , were then strt t c t iooe ts consent of the petitioners, which again . placed th e P - 1 in a minority of one. i,;ec ted et i : William Bray, of 8, Clarence -street, was the!' ° i' re ct c by Mr. Ti estoett on the ground of arrcar of Wid e ' s od' e 0 Struck off the poll. a rs.n- Thomas Maguire was also struck off on the sata cti' This again gave the petitioners a majority of one. e t he P et . John Ennis, letter-carrier, was next struck Ot o f ot g, tioner's poll, which restored the parties to an equa,g Y e e 64 Mr. AUSTIN said that there were no more post-eluvoirgoo Mr. WRANGIIAM—What vote do you intend IroP.t r ity. to Mr. AUSTIN—It is your part to place us in a min hitherto Mr. Youso—Has it not been the usual course n oth er strike off two voters a-side alternately ? • e tne Ba wer) individual u A al us t T o tN o — b je l e f t th to e , H I o n n ,o . o l\ id le s n vi h n e i r o;l o y ul o d bia g c l t r _4l,aug —but I don't believe I can find another. fete Mr. WRANGIIAM—i take it that that is decisive. othe r Mr. AUSTIN—Take it as y ou c hoose; s trike off al t t he if you can. on f khsot. 0 The petitioners then objected to Thomas Bac the t en o ground of being in arrcar of Wide-street cess at Col voting. 4' the " 1( A discussion ensu e d as t o the applicability 0. e'li'' lector's evidence. The Committee d ec id e d that there was no stllncien' 11• of donee to remove the vo t e o f Backhouse from the Pe_., it o t he Considerable amusement was afforded by the_ r e e_ i bted _ at decision. The faces of the petitioners' Counsel Alamo W h ere ltgl, appearauce of blank dismay, and the sitting e rs asserted with confidence that of the few objecte.o. _ iitbo . w remained to the petitioners, there was not one will° to certain would be decided in their favour. ,_ ut t he c ! rt f i, The probability n-as audibly discussed throug c n„% it her P a rt} the proceedings would terminate ill favour 11. oli fti by what is commonly termed a " tie." 0 ' l‘ lC l e r il o N f V B R I A , N T ( Zn i cess. 4 b eilig r , • CO° c ote Mr. AUSTIN objected to the evidence in thi s , rhe ~, ett very confused with reference to door-numbe rs. as n -street, talge:ortoef ‘o,t,ride !stret Thoma s " t himself deposed that there were 4 houses in all A o f f te ‘ h rviischmni.teioreteskneomovsnolatsatBio2o,,Ttlhioemcaso-rostoriejettt.ee _ ti , roe i c ile c c i l f t v el , there was " no sufficient evidence to rem ove the lie f atr iA ward O'Neill from the poll." Kelly (the lowest in their list of objected vote s _l coo lf oo d, The petitioners abandoned the objection o r g ss a . inst . c oh , The petitioners having thus failed in thr b ee„ "__ p rey 1 , 0 0 tl l° by o'clock. i w e a c s ti° s n ti s n tfhuerthfeerveirnischreaasicixdi.ety It sv h vi i • c a l s i Inlsd• a eg to o r a e rter , to 1 a 0 c petitioners.lDuring the discussion upon the case, it wa . 1 ob . ' ' liehael Brien was the next objected vo_t_esransento announce 0 occon the the Speaker was at prayers. jetted N Ir. tAot•stirl the x receptionhaviiig obotfaitnheed e r , ) ,i e d r e m n i c, s e sio ia l c i r t at o nhtis P o r .ca - as se v , os e t n ec lor ground that the date of the collector's in* I R oc, to the period of Brien voting. the Co mmittee when Mr. AUSTIN observed, that by a ru replying ., _ f t he Mr. TIMMER was proceeding to a ddress t he he was precluded, in a case like this, Mr. YOUNG objected to any „........7....... fr001 fr0m t ti h : r ule° Past fonr Committee. In ; t v of c' lle :01 1 o'clock, until eleven o'clock thi d s al m a i °rd terdaY ..1 The sitting Member has a provisieoinsion The Committee then adjourned at tcn of ye 4. _ consequence of the Committee's de departure u r e 11 lea ° ......------.......-- 1.0 reference to John _Armstrong's vote. Alaie3 1 hoen bru° f n stea — ° f 1 .--- Palace of Sc a VIENNA, APRIL 2' Presburc- on the 4th, and go to the resideoce,%„ches9 e., • s .•r saintlier l in t u h t e es .v P " ' P . ' which thee have cliw en for Oct ed Lucca, sister to the Empress, d There i' a rep :s r on 4 to her to use the baths at Baden. c u the osse ; r a su its to Laxenburg' , because the impro_so, es i b lo e t al tn th a l ‘ oc it nec t es tra rtY . tb e e t d visit o fifth thi s P of annual revenue, and the expecte connected ni yorturlitf o ff Vienna this summer is suppose- Persons belonging to the Cour , d E u m e h p i r e e : s t o M t a h r e i Du o e u i o s a f Lwtillelc iftitdioru,,ir.liheno; ila her ve a no , v 7 . : o :i c e h je e s s t ! soof . t this young 1 / 4 Angouleme, represen atz paper. some and atniable.—Ger m seeingßer Berry) the who Cisouhnetreesson illvlsniYt (daughter auolfit with Princess as et:tite'ree;"clYcbbc°llssd‘